What does it mean to have a mental illness?

I think even if society was more understanding and tolerant, about differences and such....I would still have some functioning difficulties(so its a problem of the individual in that sense) and I think plenty of others would to. However society would be better equipped to deal with that and help individuals with their difficulties rather than ostracizing them or bringing them down because of these differences.

I'd say its a mixture of issues that make things difficult for the individual, but also society probably plays a role in how disabling a condition is.

Well the dictionary defines abnormal in part as "undesirable or worrying". Some of the synonyms are also derogatory. I already thought that way so it just affirmed it. The definition of atypical:

1.
not representative of a type, group, or class.
"a sample of people who are rather atypical of the target audience"
synonyms:unusual, untypical, uncommon, unconventional, unorthodox, irregular, abnormal, anomalous, aberrant, deviant, unrepresentative; More
antonyms:normal

I do notice a synonym is abnormal but I don't feel the definition is derogatory.

You can have a disorder that is disabling and still have gifts as a result of the disorder itself. Virginia Woolf is a perfect example of someone with an incredible gift to write and eventually succumbed to her depression via suicide. She deliberately refused medication because she feared loss of her ability to create and I'm sure she was right about that.

Temple grandin has taken meds and is very successful. Her way of seeing and therefore her success in agriculture is due to her autism which effects how she processes. An example of treating autism as a disorder and a gift.

Aren't you a reader? There are a couple of books by Armstrong about autism and Neuro diversity.

Neurodiversity: discovering the extraordinary gifts...

The power of neurodiversity: unleashing the advantages...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I used to read a lot of books...before that horribleness that is ptsd, now its hard for me to concentrate on reading like I used to. But I still like researching information and what not so I still read up on stuff...just have to take my time and not read too much at once or I miss most of what I'm reading.

And I know people with autism can have gifts, I just don't think I have any particular gift...maybe I have some skills in some areas but nothing spectacular. there isn't really anything I am exceptionally good at that I can think of. But yes it wont hurt to look into those books when I get the chance.

I find so far meds haven't really helped significantly...the valium sort of helps anxiety/panic and trazodone helps me sleep. I haven't had any luck with anti-depressants however and have just found they make me more anxious or wellbutrin makes it feel like I'm on a bunch of adderall(did take it recreationally a few times in the past) but without the euphoria so yeah just not much luck.

Definitely start with your brain is a rainforest then. It is an except from one of those books. I suspect you do but I get the impression you have been sidetracked in a number of ways. Trauma leading to PTSD; Recreational drug use (which I am not putting down. I did too and there are things about those experiences I wouldn't trade.) You're very intelligent for one thing. That is clear in your posts.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All I was doing by my post, was an explanation for how/why mental illnesses happen. There is no reason to get offended by what I posted. It's the truth, not an insult. That is the physical and scientific truth. Do some research if you doubt me. Here are some simple definitions for those who are stuck on words. Normal - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary Another way to put it is; outside the expected. Different than the common or majority.

Medical Dictionary
developmental disability n.
A cognitive, emotional, or physical impairment, especially one related to abnormal sensory or motor development, that appears in infancy or childhood and involves a failure or delay in progressing through the normal developmental stages of childhood.

mental illness
— n
any of various disorders in which a person's thoughts, emotions, or behaviour are so abnormal as to cause suffering to himself, herself, or other people
Medical defiinition: mental illness;
Any of various disorders characterized chiefly by abnormal behavior or an inability to function socially, including diseases of the mind and personality and certain diseases of the brain. Also called mental disease , mental disorder .

SC!ENTIFIC! truth?

Alrighty, then.

*sits on her azz in awe of SC!ENCE!*

Wait... only the first and second definition talk about different things. Nowhere it says it's developmental, starts in childhood and causes delays in development.

and using online dictionary and posting definition is in no way "science".

And if you are refering to "science" as in "medical model of MI" that is no way as failproof as some would believe.

EDIT: with all due respect do some research if you don't believe me. I read the standard info you are citing a long time ago and my critical thinking brain said look on.

I don't think you were intentionally trying to offend. There are many people trying to change the way MI is looked at. While I wouldn't say it is very new it has not completely sunk in. Go to sites like TED talks and there are a ton of speakers talking about these new paradigms. (I don't think I have heard anyone actually dispute neurodiversity.) One of the key points I made earlier is normal is primarily determined by the culture and abnormal follows since abnormal is "not normal". "Normal" can't exist in the natural world.

I don't think having a MI means someone is unable to function in society either. Many people here demonstrate this is just wrong every day. I find that definition to be extremely offensive. No wonder so many doctors demand patient compliance over a patient centric approach if that is what they believe.

The other key point which I must seem like a stickler about (I won't argue that) is that they do not know definitively it is a "disease of the brain". They also do not understand (completely) why there is such an increase in people diagnosed over the last 20 years or so. With other diseases you would look for some environmental cause for it. While there are various ideas the main research still concentrates on "abnormal brains". This is in spite of the fact, for example, we know SAD is the worst diet in the world. Eat any other traditional diet in any country and you will feel better if you eat a SAD diet. Why is NIMH not looking for a correlation? From a cynical POV I would say they rely on a lot of big pharma money.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Good point. The whole point of the scientific method is to allow theories to be modified based on new facts. (Facts are real. Theories are an interpretation of a collection of facts.)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

perhaps the increase in diagnoses of mental illness is partially due to problems in society, but people would rather focus on why the individuals suffering from it are flawed...rather than what flaws in society might be contributing to mental health problems. I think there certainly needs to be treatment and help for people with mental illnesses but there are lots of problems in society that contribute that should be adressed. For instance many politicians act as though its a waste of resources to have programs to help the poor, when poverty is proven to contribute to mental health issues...its blamed on not trying/working hard enough. How are people supposed to be healthy in such an unhealthy society?

I was giving those definitions to clear up previous definitions of normal that were only derogatory. I was also posting them for those who had a hangup with the definitions of the words i had used to begin with. I understand there are those who get hung up on words because of negative uses and i simply put those out there so they could see that there was more than one definition. I was not saying those definitions are scientific prove of my original post. That's why i suggested research on mental illnesses. That's where you'll find the evidence that a lot of them are developmental. As in, how the brain develops. Again, this can be caused by environment, nurture, or genetics, or a mix. This goes for any singularity, personality trait, etc. as well. It's true that science gives room for new theories and nothing is Fact. However, this is what we know as of now, and that's all I was stating. As I also said, there is new evidence that some mental health issues can be caused by an actual disease such as a virus. I did not intend to limit it to all. And I truly did not mean personal offense against any illness, disorder, etc. My point by saying it was scientific proof, was basically like saying that it is scientific proof that my crooked finger was caused by it being smashed and broken in a door at 4 years old.

I re-read books by L.M. Montgomery recently and found few possibly depressive characters (well both LMM and her husband had suffered depression, although her is rather on side of PTSD... and maybe world-woe). Made think that in a way it was easier for these people in society that is simplier and not so overwhelming. As much as I am a city girl, I sometimes get overwhelmed by all duties modern life entails. Just too much to take in at times.

do you mean Torrey's cat poop theory?

No. I'm talking about a relatively newly discovered disease called anti-NMDA-receptor autoimmune encephalitis, and some other similar ones. First discovered in 2007 by Dr. Dalmau. Although this is something that does not always recur, and therefore does not have the same qualifications, I personally would not be surprised if they discovered a lot of mental disorders are caused by something similar, and/or inflammation in the brain.

I do want to point out that when i was first diagnosed i asked multiple doctors, neurologists, and psychologists what happens to the brain that makes the illness After the cause. ie: Genetics, trauma, etc. This is the start of where I got my information. I'm not pulling this out of thin air.

The definition I posted was abnormal not normal. That would be the one to post alternate definitions about.

I think you are confusing the difference between fact and theory in science. In your example:

breaking a finger by smashed in a door is a fact. Except that you were four it is the only fact I have.

The reason you had your finger in the door would be a theory. Currently I do not have enough information to support any theory. If you told me your brother was mad at you I might conclude he put your finger in the door. As I gather more facts I can modify my theory or support my theory as needed.

There are facts about MI such as separated twins can have the same MI. Fact. That there is a genetic/ bio combination is a theory just like evolution is a theory. So far the facts we have related to each support their respective theories. But science allows them to change. Quick lesson on scientific method.

You said "not developing normally". I'm not sure that is even a theory. It might be a hypothesis. Either way it does not have many supporting facts compared to environmental impacts. And I repeat: normal is based on how your culture defines it. A moving target. It has certainly changed in my lifetime.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The symptoms are schizophrenia >like<. That is not the same thing as causing schizophrenia. You might be right about viruses but my money is on the intestinal system.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

how about this, not developing as expected. Does that satisfy you? The fact I was talking about with my finger is the Affect. Because my finger was broken in a door, it is now crooked. Granted that technically is not a fact, but probable. I say fact lightly. I shouldn't. In my experience, most people don't separate fact from probable theory. I had no intentions of this getting down to the significance of a slight misuse of a word. Which is all it's become. The bottom line, is that my first post is true to the best of our knowledge at this point, with the allowances of light use of some words (to get the general point across), and with it, there was no offense.

Yes, but it's commonly misdiagnosed as a mental illness. So for the purpose of my explanation, "mental illness" (unknowingly not) can be caused by a virus. And actually it causes all sorts of things like paranoia, and hallucinations. So no, although short term, it does cause mental disorders.

I had broke arm as child. It hurts when it rains now. I broke my toe, never seen a doc and it is crooked.

But... my brain is NOT broken. We may have problems functioning, we suffer the hell at times... but please, don't generalize that MH issue cause any differences in "development".

What is "developimng as expected" anyways? Who expects what?

Never thought you were pulling out of thin air. Not impressed with doctors that come out of school and rely on sales people for new information which is more common than you think. Have met two teaching - a t and a psychologist that didn't seem to read anything new any more. Point isn't that they weren't good professionals. It's that I like to know their background before I completely trust the info they give me. My t and my pa regularly study new information which why I like them.


As long as it is presented as a theory

That your finger is bent from the door is fact. It is repeatable. I could go smash my finger and have it be bent too.

Again. Didn't take it as an intended offense. But the claim of an abnormally developing brain for most MI is offensive to me whether you intended it or not.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well the use of the word "normal" tends to be a bit of a challenge.

I you go and sit in a busy mall for a while and just "people watch", it will not take long before you recognize that every single person is different. If anything "normal" is actually unique. And what most human beings have in common is our legs arms, hands, ears, noses and other parts, but those too are unique to each person in size etc. So it is not unreasonable to think about how each person will also have a uniqueness in their brains too.

I saw a study being done on rats and the study was about sexuality. They took a rat and put a little jacket on that rat before introducing it to a female rat in heat. The rat mated several times over the course of several days and all was well. Then, they took that same rat, took the little jacket off and again put him in with a female in heat, what they observed is the rat really struggled to mate. What they learned from that is that the rat connected the mating with the jacket and without it, just could not seem to mate.

While that experiment was learning about sexual behaviors, honestly it showed a lot more than just that. So while we are all unique, we imprint a lot of things depending on our family, and our culture too.

So when we say "normal", again, what is normal is being unique and more ways then we realize. If we talk about MI, then again, that too will also be unique to each person. We can identify certain symptoms that are shared by groups of unique individuals, however, these symptoms can vary simply by the mere fact that we are all unique.

What we have been learning about is some of the differences that individuals can have that can make their ability to learn and adapt different, but even as we learn about these various challenges, again, each person is going to be unique.

So when we use the word "normal" it is important to recognize that there is no model of a person that we can truly use and say, that man/woman is normal.

OE

Because this thread has gone off topic, it will now be closed.